Towards Accessible e-Book Platforms

In Aesop’s fable of the Fox and the Crane the crane invites the fox to supper providing refreshment in a narrow necked flagon. The crane – with her long slender beak - can easily reach the contents but the fox can only sit and watch in envy. For people with disabilities, e-books can evoke much the same feeling. The content, which can open up a feast of learning and enjoyment, is there: if only it can be accessed in the first place.

Who was involved and why? e-Books can help offer a level playing field for people with a print impairment. Less than 5% of hardcopy books ever make it to alternative formats. With e-books availability could be 100% serving a much wider user base. The case for accessibility of e-books is powerful. The Further Education (FE) sector alone in January 2010 had nearly a million e-book page views on a single platform. To move this forward there is a need to raise awareness of accessibility issues; increase the capacity to assess the accessibility of e-book platforms and to support the publishing industry in developing expertise in the accessibility of e-books.

A small scale project was funded to: explore the accessibility of e-book platforms; offer specific confidential advice for participating partners; provide generic guidance for publishers and aggregators.

This was sponsored by JISC TechDis, JISC Collections and the Publishers Licensing Society. Hereafter for brevity both publishers and aggregators will be inferred from the term 'publishers'.

Accessibility is important for all partners. For the JISC partners it influences an institution's exposure under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). Previous work by the JISC national e-books observatory project reported that disabled users were facing many challenges in using e-book platforms. One of the key recommendations was to focus on user centric design to enable all users to make use of e-book content. For publishers it influences customer experience and potential library procurement decisions.

 

Publishers were invited to engage in the project by submitting their e-book platforms for free confidential accessibility and usability testing. Publishers were encouraged to attend the testing and where this was not possible then a video of the process was offered. Testing was carried out by Shaw Trust which employs testers with different disabilities. The assistive technology used in the testing was the daily working medium for each tester. Anonymity was of paramount importance, so that publishers should not be concerned as to whether their platform was currently accessible and usable, the whole point being for publishers to actively engage, understand the issues and how to address them. That said a number of areas of existing good practice have been highlighted and the feedback from participating publishers is very positive.

What the participating publishers felt - representative quotes:In particular we learned that the basic structure and layout of pages can have a big impact on accessibility.

Overall a hugely useful exercise and one we are very glad we participated in.

How we did it and why this matters to academic publishersThe holistic approach The JISC TechDis service pioneered the holistic approach to accessibility recognising that accessibility is multifaceted and that a simple technical checklist approach is likely to prove inadequate. For this research we took a user-centred and task-centred perspective. User testing was completed by team members from Shaw Trust, each an assistive technology user in their own right. Testing was completed on the PC platform only. The access technologies used included:

keyboard-only; mouse only; voice recognition only; screen reader only.

In addition colour, contrast, low vision issues and accessibility statements were also examined.

Each tester was asked to complete a series of tests that replicated typical user activities. These included:

logging on to the platform; personalising their view of the platform; browsing to a book and reading three pages; browsing to a book and using the table of contents to jump to a section

and read the page; searching on a search term.

Where facilities were available users were also asked to test: bookmarking a page; extracting a quote; citing a quote; annotating a page and exporting annotations to a word processor.

Bridging the barriersThe model below illustrates the stages involved in accessing an e-book. At each stage in the process users with disabilities can experience barriers. Once a barrier has occurred the accessibility of all the later stages is compromised. The need for consistent good practice cannot be clearer. A high level of accessibility on the right-hand side of the bridge is wholly undermined if the user is locked out at an earlier stage. For the purpose of our research we started with the first point over which the publisher has control - logging onto the e-book platform. Each of the subsequent elements is explored in the sections that follow. Each section will look at issues for users (including evidence from the research) and at good practice recommendations.

Figure 1 - e-Book platform accessibility: the JISC TechDis bridge model.

Benefits for publishersAccessibility will be an important procurement criterion in the future. The JISC Collections ‘e-Books for FE’ project was launched in earnest in autumn 2009 and by December 2009 was recording over 800,000 page views per month from 34 colleges. When a resource becomes that significant to a learner’s success accessibility is more than an ethical consideration - it becomes a legal responsibility. Under the DDA education providers have very clear duties to provide an accessible service. There is an increasing (and justified) pressure on institutional procurement policies to ensure content services within the institution are fully accessible to all users. e-Book platforms present both an opportunity and a threat. A well-designed platform can deliver content to the widest range of users reducing pressure on tutors, learners, disability support officers and publishers (who no longer need to source alternative formats). However, where the e-book platform creates unnecessary barriers, institutions are very exposed to legal action from disabled people who could rightly claim to be discriminated against unfairly and unnecessarily.

A further consideration where accessibility takes on a new significance is the trend towards mobile access to resources. Internet access is a standard feature in new phones and a number of library services are already making catalogues available to mobile users. The clean, flexible, consistent interfaces that support high levels of disabled access are very similar to those required for use on a mobile browser.

It is in the interest of all stakeholders, especially publishers, to minimise the barriers and maximise the benefits of e-book platforms. To do so requires a good understanding of the platform from a user-centred perspective. The following sections unpack the key issues facing users at each stage in the bridge model.

Logging on to the platformThe bridge diagram shows that users may have to log on to their institutional learning platform then navigate to the e-book platform and log on again. In some cases this is (or can be) addressed by single sign-on access. The testers were tasked with

logging on to the e-book platform only - institutional platforms did not come into the testing since these are not the responsibility of the publisher. Remote login has huge potential for disabled users – travel and physical access difficulties evaporate. But login processes need to be well designed to avoid creating new barriers.

Issues for users Password complexity (length and requirements) - minimum length

requirements and the insistence on mixed letters / numbers / punctuation can make passwords very difficult to remember;

positioning of the login dialogue box - in terms of how many tabs it takes to get there for non-mouse users or for those who can not see the screen;

size and location of confirm buttons - small buttons can be difficult for those with motor difficulties. How close the confirm button is to the dialogue box will influence accessibility for those using screen magnification or small screen devices;

labelling for screen reader - is the button labelled in a way that a screen reader user knows it is a login dialogue rather than another dialogue?

error trapping and effort required in repeating the process - how long does it take to correct if a mistake is made?

If the user can not login easily or the login process takes too long they may abandon a visit to a collection. They may also begin to expect further accessibility problems once logged in - even if this fear is unfounded.

What the research showedIn the platforms we tested the mouse and voice recognition users took between 3 and 5 actions to login. The screen reader user took between 3 and 4 actions except with one platform where the user took 13 actions. The keystroke only user took between 15 and 40 actions. Apart from this logging in was not problematic although the following quotes highlight that some straightforward adjustments could improve the experience even further:

“Login was easy with no real problems. However I found the login boxes and text a little too small and would find text resizing widgets a great help.”

“No problems accessing the login boxes and the login button. I would suggest having a more prominent highlighting mechanism to increase visibility when tabbing. It would be an advantage if the tab order was changed in order to access the login details first.”

“I found no problem logging on to the platform, this took me 3 actions, clicking in the edit box, typing the password and then clicking on go. One thing I would like to mention is that when I tabbed to the Go button it was difficult to actually see I had tabbed on to the button.”

Although it was not in the remit of the study, logging out needs to be considered if it is a feature of the system.

Good practice Ensure password requirements are not overcomplex in terms of length

or characters required. Ensure that tab order reaches the login box in minimal keystrokes. Ensure confirm buttons are close to the text field and of adequate size

for users with poor mouse skills and let the Enter key work as confirm. Ensure text can be adequately magnified to support visually impaired

users. Ensure all text entry fields are appropriately labelled. Ensure adequate visibility of the cursor position for users using

keystrokes or who are visually impaired. Ensure that logging out is simple and that the logout button or link is

situated prominently. Ensure any system messages are meaningful to the users.

Search for title Searching for a book or books and opening for reading is usually the focus of a visit to the e-book library. For disabled people an e-book platform promises a level of independence and freedom that is impossible in a physical library setting. Suddenly wheelchair users can reach all the shelves and blind users need no-one to accompany them to describe shelf contents. However this may not be as straight forward as it seems particularly for those using assistive technology. It is worth noting that the testers were testing with one e-book in one platform at a time. In real life users will be searching for a range of books not necessarily in the same collection.

Issues for users Searching for and opening an e-book often requires following a number of steps:

1. navigate to the Search Edit box;2. type in the search terms – accurately;3. submit the query;4. navigate through the search results; 5. select a book or books; 6. open for reading;

Each of these steps seems straightforward enough but users with assistive technologies may have a different experience at different stages for example:

the positioning of the text entry box influences the number of actions needed to get there for keyboard-only users;

if the results page is a very different layout from the search page there can be navigation difficulties for screen reader users who can not see that the layout has changed;

if the search box entry needs confirming by clicking a separate button (rather than pressing Enter) an extra layer of complexity has been added for those who can not see the screen;

the error tolerance of search term spellings can make a difference for dyslexic users;

hyperlinks to search results are often very generic – e.g. ‘More..’ or ‘Open book..’ etc. This creates problems for screen reader users whose link list simply reads More, More, More etc.

What the research showedThis task was generally a very accessible one for most testers except keyboard-only users. Two platforms showed high accessibility with all users performing the task in less than 10 actions. Screen reader accessibility was good on all bar one platform typical responses being “No problems searching for a book and reading the content”.

Actions required to search for and open an e-book

Keyboard-only users were especially disadvantaged having to tab from the beginning again each time a page was changed in any way.

“I first entered my search into the search box, 9 actions. I then selected a book which took 18 actions. To open the book it then took 21 tabs.” …this apparently simple task took a total of 48 actions!

Another platform attracted the following comment:

Act

ions

requ

ired

Platforms 1 – 7

“It takes 18 tabs to access the edit field to perform a search, then 1 tab to access the ‘search button’ to run the search. Then it takes me 50 tab presses to get to the results."

Good practice Use a skip navigation link or shortcut keys to get to main content. Where possible create spelling tolerant search tools. Ideally there

should be a ‘did you mean?’ facility. This needs to be accessed easily without the need to navigate down from the top of the page again.

Error messages need to be plain English and well positioned for people using magnification (who only see a portion of the screen) and they need to be announced immediately for screen reader users.

Search should be activated on pressing Enter after inputting the search term(s).

Layouts should be consistent between screens wherever possible. Link text for books etc should be uniquely described wherever

possible so that screen reader link lists can take users directly to the book without having to read the whole search results text to match the link to the required book.

Navigate within the titleThis consists of navigating text, navigating the table of contents and bookmarking in order to find your way back to key areas. These tools benefit all users and are especially useful for users with literacy difficulties, concentration difficulties and a range of other print impairments. A significant number of the testers experienced few or no difficulties with this task. But where difficulties occurred they tended to be persistent. The more complex the services offered the more the opportunity exists to create inadvertent barriers through neglect or inconsistency. There are a range of considerations as outlined below.

Issues for users Page layout and navigation - complex page layouts with different

content / function in different sub pages or frames can cause particular difficulties – moving between the table of contents and the actual e-book can be very difficult to achieve without the use of a mouse. One screen reader user stated they could not easily get out of the book to the navigation frame.

Inconsistent functionality – for example:o sometimes magnification and resizing options only apply to the

index and not the entire title and often a separate set of controls

is available for the title. This differentiation can be confusing for users;

o voice activation and keyboard-only access may not work with all features - bookmarking is often inaccessible to non-mouse users;

o on one platform the screen reader user could successfully get to a book but not read the content without the assistance of a sighted person because the ‘open and read’ link was not picked up by the screen reader and needed clicking with a mouse.

Opening new windows without prior warning can be a problem for screen reader users. In some platforms bookmarking a page involves opening a new window which seems unnecessary.

Consistency, distinctiveness and clarity of icons are important – one system had a feature represented by a pair of magnifying glasses accompanied by a plus symbol and a minus symbol. One user assumed these represented ‘enlarge text’ and ‘reduce text’ whereas in fact the icons represented ‘next search result’ and ‘previous search result’.

Sometimes there is no notification for screen reader users when the content of a window has changed.

What the research showed There was inconsistency both between and within platforms. The number of keystrokes it took a keyboard-only user to get to an e-book and navigate through the text varied from 5 to 170. The mean across all the platforms tested was over 50 keystrokes. One screen reader user declared the task impossible without the help of a sighted person: “Firstly I would not have been able to complete this task without the help of a sighted person as the ‘open and read’ link is not picked up by a screen reader. After this link was selected by a mouse user I had no problems accessing the next page links and reading pages.”

However the number of steps for mouse-only users varied only between 3 and 9, and voice recognition users achieved the same task in only 4 to 8 steps.

Sometimes a task was possible but only when you were inducted into the secrets; for example, being notified of dynamic changes to the screen that you can not actually see. The screen reader user wrote of one platform “When I accessed the links on the page I found the link ’book mark manager’ after I chose this link I was unaware that a mouse over action had appeared, it was only through being told I was aware that this had happened. I then re entered my links list dialogue box to see that there were new links available ‘Add book mark’. After selecting this link another window opened of which I was unaware of until told. I then needed to give the bookmark a name so I accessed my form fields box to find that this edit field is unlabelled also. After naming the bookmark I could then choose the ‘Save and close’ link to close the window that has opened. This took me 4 actions”.

Finally there could be issues when the tools (and associated conventions) passed from the e-book platform to a third party e-book reader such as Adobe Reader or Adobe Digital Editions. Accessibility features might be better or worse on the reader compared to the platform but in the absence of clear guidance differences merely resulted in confusion.

Good practice Skip links can greatly enhance the experience of keyboard-only users

as well as screen reader users. Platform designers need to be aware of e-book functionality as a

separate issue distinct from platform functionality. There needs to be clear guidance for user modification of reader settings e.g. colour change, font change, magnification etc, within titles as well as within platforms.

It is important to many groups of users that systems display consistency across all titles wherever practicable. Familiarity of layout and design increases usability.

Icons should be consistent throughout the platform and not contradict common conventions.

Avoid using coding that dynamically changes pages (e.g. updates information within an existing page without refreshing it). Where pages change dynamically some users, for example screen reader and screen magnifier users, will be unaware of the change. These users may need to be alerted in some other way or have an alternative means of accessing the updated page.

Access the text directly or indirectly Once the user has navigated to the chosen section of the book they will need to access the text. Accessing text is about being able to use the text in meaningful ways; it involves being able to get to the book in the first place and then read the text comfortably without strain or fatigue. The great promise of ePUB and PDF formats is the ability to present the final text in a range of ways that can be adapted to suit the user. Traditional print books are fixed formats to which the user must adapt but e-books and e-journals are flexible formats that can adapt to the user whether by magnification, colour and contrast changes or text-to-speech. However the extent to which the benefits of e-books are realised depends on several factors.

Issues for users Magnification: older people with declining eyesight, individuals with

visual impairment and people with dyslexia may all struggle with small font sizes. Even people with good eyesight can have difficulties reading

on a computer monitor that has been set to a high resolution or is in bright sunlight. Although most e-book platforms allow font resizing the range of options is usually narrow, and often around the 8 – 14 point range, offering few benefits to people who genuinely need it.

Text reflow: when text is magnified it may automatically re-wrap to fit the page or it may simply enlarge the page within a frame and rely on the user scrolling left and right to read the entire line. Whenever a user has to scroll left and right to read the line they experience massive barriers to efficient access.

Colour and contrast: there are many circumstances where the ability to change text colour and background will make a difference to the user. For people with visual difficulties and dyslexia the ability to customise colour and contrast may be critical to efficiently accessing the text. Even people with no disabilities may find their reading experience enhanced if they can control colour and contrast when working in varying ambient light levels.

Text-to-speech: for a significant number of users text-to-speech is a vital tool for accessing text. Text-to-speech software is used by dyslexic readers to enhance their understanding of the content and, in many cases, to offer faster and more efficient reading. Blind readers use more sophisticated technologies that not only read the content but also menus, error messages and system commands.

What the research showed In our research we asked testers to open an e-book and browse three pages counting the number of actions this took them. This varied from platform to platform but the best and worst cases are listed in the table below:

Technology Best case (number of actions required)

Worst case (number of actions required)

Mouse access 3 8 Keyboard-only 11 170 Screen reader access 9 38 where possible but not

possible on some platforms

Voice control 4 8

In general, most platforms scored reasonably well for one or other assistive technology but only one scored well for all. Screen readers and keyboard-only access proved the most challenging but there was still huge variability - the best platform for voice recognition and keyboard-only access was inaccessible to the screen reader! Over 50% of the platforms examined could not be usefully accessed by screen reader but it often depended on the nature of the task. Browsing for a book was more challenging “At present it is only possible for the user to select a book with a large amount of assistance from a sighted user.” The reason for this was highlighted on another platform “Difficult to browse to a book ...as all subject links are tagged as ‘See All’ rather than – e.g. ‘Agriculture See All’”. Where platforms failed in terms of accessibility the issue was nearly always due to inconsistent practice. The

following quote illustrates the issue: “I would not have been able to complete this task without the help of a sighted person as the open and read link is not picked up by a screen reader. After this link was selected by a mouse user I had no problems accessing the next page links and reading three pages. This took me two actions to read to the next page.”

Many of the platforms tested were hybrid technologies - some parts of the platform were web based but the e-book itself might be delivered as a PDF document, a webpage, or a proprietary interface. This caused some confusion for users trying to adjust text size and colour. Sometimes this was built into the system, sometimes it relied on the user changing browser settings and sometimes it required the user to know how to change preferences in Adobe Reader. There was no obvious signposting in most cases.

Good practice Many of the barriers observed to accessing the text were simple to put right. All the platforms tested had evidence of some good practice but the good practice was inconsistently implemented and the fundamental problems were often more to do with quality assurance than accessibility awareness. The multiple tabbing required by keyboard users could be reduced by well chosen skip link options. Barriers for screen readers were sometimes as simple as a button being unlabelled or – worse still – poorly labelled like the one where the tester commented “Unless you knew that the tab with the ALT text was ebknvtbs/tab2a you would not find Notes/Bookmark”.

We recommend publishers to: use skip links intelligently and consistently to allow keyboard-only users

and screen reader users to navigate more effectively; decide how font size and colour changes will be available to the user

(e.g. in-line, via browser, via Adobe reader). Clearly signal this to the user where they need to go to get the information;

ensure text can be adequately magnified to support visually impaired users. A range from 8 point to 30 point (hard copy equivalent) is recommended;

ensure text reflows when magnified; if text-to-speech is provided signpost clearly how it should be

accessed. If text-to-speech is not provided ensure text is selectable for screen reader users and text-to-speech users;

make sure user testing includes disabled users.

Export data and quotes Within an academic context the ultimate purpose of reading a book is to use it for a curriculum related use. Users are likely to want to export text extracts or diagrams into their own notes or directly to assignments. This might be achieved in a variety of ways from cutting and pasting to using inbuilt functions that export selected text and provide a citation. As is often the case e-books have the edge over traditional books in this respect. Someone with motor control difficulties may find difficulty manipulating a physical book and rewriting key quotes or redrawing diagrams. An e-book normally allows users to rapidly collect quotes, data and diagrams to resurface them with their own arguments and examples.

Issues for users Signposting: different platforms have different tools available. Users can waste a lot of time trying to find the tool they need. For disabled users the process can take disproportionately longer. Different platforms provided tools of different sophistication such as automatic citation on text collected on the clipboard or inbuilt annotation facilities that can be bundled together and exported. The following issues could affect users:

awareness raising: if you provide additional functionality is it accessible to all users?

functionality versus simplicity: is there a simpler interface that has less functionality but as a result is easier to navigate and access with assistive technologies?

are there keyboard shortcuts for accessing particular functions and, if so, where do people find out about them?

screen reader access: less than half the platforms tested allowed screen readers to access the text. In our testing no screen reader user managed to export quotes to another document.

What the research showedOne of the user tasks was to ‘extract a quote using the e-book platform’. This raised interesting issues that included user perception, platform functionality and digital rights management (DRM).

Some users were pragmatic and simply selected text for copying and pasting, for example the mouse user who said this task was “done easily by simply highlighting the required quote and use

the copy and paste facilities”. However the same user had a different experience on another platform where the DRM meant he could “highlight text but not copy or paste the required text. I could not find any tool to allow me to do this”.

More significantly however certain users were unable even to access the text in order to select it. The voice recognition user claimed “I cannot extract a quote as I have no means of accessing text within a PDF to make a selection”. The screen reader user struggled (and failed) on most platforms to extract specific quotes but one platform allowed the whole content of the relevant page to be emailed - a good solution for any user.

One platform automatically provided citations for quotes extracted from the text. This is, in itself, an accessibility benefit since it saves time for the user and reduces the likelihood of errors.

Good practiceIn an academic context, half the value of a book in digital format is the ability to rapidly integrate text and images into an assignment. To make this process as accessible as possible the following practices should be observed:

test the platform with disabled users. Only one of the platforms we tested was accessible to all users in this respect;

clearly signpost what functionality is available; whether this is simple cut and paste or a more sophisticated system;

clearly signpost what functionality is not available. Where DRM prevents users extracting text for their own use, users should be advised in order to avoid wasting their time with trial and error;

manage user expectations. A simple cut and paste solution that is accessible to all may be better than a sophisticated citation system that is inaccessible to assistive technology users. Or offer both and clarify the benefits of each;

focus on simple, robust functionality and do not assume that all users are mouse users.

Recommendations for good practiceFive themes emerged from the research and our key recommendations are CHIME: Communicate, Help users, Implement, Moderate, Embed. Communicate

As a priority, have an accessibility statement. There are many ways this can be described (user preferences, personalisation, accessibility) but the statement must:

o be easy to find;o use plain English;o address the key usability concerns of disabled users;o avoid making assumptions as to the existing skills of the user.

Help Users Identify which accessibility features in your platform address different

user needs. This should include people who need magnification and / or colour change, keyboard-only users, screen reader users and voice recognition users.

Signpost inbuilt benefits and / or third party accessibility features (e.g. web browser and Adobe Reader functionality).

Signpost potential difficulties up front, suggesting alternatives where possible (e.g. contact email for standalone PDF version).

Where accessibility functions vary in different parts of the platform (e.g. inbuilt, in the browser or in Acrobat reader) clarify how to personalise the view in each area.

Implement Identify the main accessibility weaknesses in your platform and create

a timeline to tackle them. Prioritise improvements, starting first with those that can be most

quickly achieved (e.g. skip links to make content more easily navigable by keyboard). See section Where to Next? for strategic and practical priorities.

Play to the strengths of platforms you use. HTML, e-PUB and PDF formats allowed text resizing, text wrapping and colour changing. Incorporate these strengths in your platform.

Provide contact details in your accessibility statement so users experiencing difficulties or finding workarounds can feedback to your team. This is a highly effective way of creating community-based quality assurance.

Moderate Test accessibility and usability with disabled users. Recognise that the more fully featured your platform, the more

challenging it is to ensure consistent accessibility. Consider having different platform views, with one option optimised for accessibility and mobile devices.

Ensure your best practices are consistently applied because minor shortcomings can create major hurdles. An unlabelled button or non-unique link text can create huge barriers for screen reader users.

Ensure accessibility claims you make for your product are verifiable.

Embed Work with your developers to agree the accessibility standards you will

implement. Write these into contracts where relevant. Develop product protocols so that any new functionality or interface

designs are automatically tested for accessibility. It is cheaper to build in accessibility from the start than to retrofit afterwards.

Where to next?The research and recommendations presented here are a selection of the key results from the anonymised reports. This represents a starting point from which a wide range of stakeholders (publishers, aggregators, educationalists, librarians, disability groups etc) can develop a shared understanding of the issues and a common purpose in resolving them. There are no serious technical reasons why e-book platforms should not revolutionise access to text for disabled people and in the process give a much enhanced experience for all readers.

As a publisher the obvious questions are ‘what do I do next?’. In moving forward we believe that e-book publishers need to:

know the accessibility strengths of their platform and signpost these:o to their users so that they are aware of the benefits;o to their coders and developers so that they build on strengths;

identify areas for development and prioritise them in terms of implementation.

We acknowledge that accessibility is a journey and improvements may need to be staged for a range of practical and commercial reasons. Encouragingly, accessibility is entirely achievable – a composite platform with the best of all the platforms tested will be very close to an ideal system.

In identifying priorities for development we suggest that all the core stages on the accessibility bridge should be made accessible. This will involve both strategic and practical approaches as outlined below. These are not exhaustive suggestions and good practice will continue to evolve. However the points below are good starting points with high value to the end user and easily achievable by the publisher.

Strategic priorities Draw up an action plan based on the recommendations above. This

should include strengths and areas for development, priorities and timescales.

Organise user testing with a range of assistive technologies;  Plan and implement staff development in accessibility awareness. Free

resources are available for this (see below). Agree on and implement testing protocols so that new functionality

enhances accessibility rather than reduces it. Ensure core user requirements (login / search / open book / read /

export quotes) are accessible and usable.  Invite, collate, evaluate and implement results from user feedback.

Practical priorities Produce and upload an accessibility statement which:

o focuses on practical tools for disabled users;o clarifies where different parts of the system have different

functionalities. Implement skip links. Insert email link to named contact for assistance and feedback; Ensure ease of initial login. Ensure text can be adequately magnified. Ensure text reflows when magnified. Ensure text is accessible to third party tools such as screen readers

and text-to-speech.

Further InformationJISC TechDis - for support on alternative formats, guidance on accessible PDFs and staff development on accessibility awareness. Publisher Lookup - a collaborative website from JISC TechDis and the Publishers Association. The purpose of the website is to enable educationalists working with disabled learners to get an electronic version of published texts as quickly as possible.

RNIB online guide – a short introduction to the world of e-books: why you might like to try them, how you can use them, where you can get them, and lots more - www.rnib.org.uk/ebooks. 

The Right to Read Alliance also has wide contacts for advice and guidance.

JISC Collections - JISC national e-books observatory project – final report highlighting the importance of accessibility.

The following organisations can also offer accessibility advice and user testing:AbilityNet;BRITE;Dyslexia Action;RNIB SCOPE;Shaw Trust;Usability Exchange.

JISC TechDis March 2010.